The deceased had effectively settled his divorce ancillary relief proceedings by promising to leave a property by will to to his former wife, the claimant. He signed a document which appeared to be intended to give effect to his undertaking, but the document was not executed as a will. The respondents said that the agreement did not satisfy s40.
Held: The document showed a desire to give effect to the transaction, and was effective. There had been a written offer with an oral acceptance, and ‘it is quite clear as a matter of law that, if an offer is made in writing and is accepted orally, that contract is in law a contract in writing and accordingly there can be no question of any unenforceability of the contract made in this case by reason of the absence of a necessary memorandum.’
Judges:
Lightman J
Citations:
[2006] EWHC 1811 (Ch)
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Tiverton Estates Ltd v Wearwell Ltd CA 1975
“Subject to Contract” not to be diluted
‘subject to contract’ proposals remain in negotiation until a formal contract is executed. Lord Denning MR said: ‘for over a hundred years, the courts have held that the effect of the words ‘subject to contract’ is that the matter remains in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Wills and Probate, Contract, Land
Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.243393
